Thursday, April 4th 2024
Windows 10 Security Updates to Cost $61 After 2025, $427 by 2028
Microsoft Windows 10 is an operating system quite a few people don't want to upgrade from, and some don't even consider the move to Windows 11 an upgrade. This is especially true for businesses or other organizations that aren't sold on Windows 11. Microsoft already has a retirement plan in place, which sees the company discontinue regular security updates for the operating system on October 14, 2025, but you can keep getting these updates beyond that date, for a price.
Under the Extended Security Updates (ESU) plan for Windows 10, you can purchase a year's worth regular "patch Tuesday" security updates at $61, and keep Windows 10 alive till October 2026. Here's where it gets crazy—the price of ESU doubles each year. The October 2026 to October 2027 leg will cost you $122. This doubles again the following year, with the final October 2027 to October 2028 leg costing $244. If you plan on keeping your Windows 10 through till 2028, it will cost you a total of $427 for the three years, per machine. ESU licenses resemble the OS's main license—you either buy them electronically through the Microsoft Store or Windows 365; or as 25-digit codes in retail.
Source:
PC World
Under the Extended Security Updates (ESU) plan for Windows 10, you can purchase a year's worth regular "patch Tuesday" security updates at $61, and keep Windows 10 alive till October 2026. Here's where it gets crazy—the price of ESU doubles each year. The October 2026 to October 2027 leg will cost you $122. This doubles again the following year, with the final October 2027 to October 2028 leg costing $244. If you plan on keeping your Windows 10 through till 2028, it will cost you a total of $427 for the three years, per machine. ESU licenses resemble the OS's main license—you either buy them electronically through the Microsoft Store or Windows 365; or as 25-digit codes in retail.
84 Comments on Windows 10 Security Updates to Cost $61 After 2025, $427 by 2028
No telling hehe
As far as edge stuff well edge update is also triggered by startup/ delayed but I'd image "I just disabled edgeupdate and edgeupdatem services so see how long they stay that way lol
As long as WaaSmedic serivice is disabled properly I'd hope the two above will stay disabled
Otherwise I've been using just these I believe W1zzard also has some good stuff for edge
It probably would surprise a lot of people how many non compliant machines are running win-11 hehe
Cheers mate great stuff!!
There's a buffet of good stuff here :cool:
www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/windows-11-tweaks-for-gpu-benchmark.287480/
But that being said, we're not talking about bringing new (big) features to an old platform here, but patching vulnerabilities as they get discovered and sometimes implementing minor things like new protocols etc. And for MS, with the kind of resources they have at their disposal, and the amount of resources they spend on "nonsense" when the majority of their customers just want a "thing that works".
For consumers, I totally get the frustration. Not only are many computers working fine with the older OS version, they also may have applications or games that work better or requires this OS version. With applications there are usually newer versions (which may of course cost money), but with games especially, should people be "forced" to abandon their game collection? Sure, they can continue using the computer "air-gapped", but is it really fair to "leave them behind" and basically force them to eventually disconnect them from the Internet to continue using them? (like you basically have to do if you want to use XP or 98 today)
And for the enterprise market too, whether it's fully custom or specific software developed for a platform, then they have to spend significant resources to redevelop and certify the software because the OS changed. It can get pretty costly, and there are a lot of odd hardware in use out there. Hopefully some are smarter than to use Windows in critical environments, but unfortunately it happens a lot…
I've argued before that MS should probably move to two tiers of Windows products, a "new" branch which requires hardware newer than 3-5 years (and probably not the low-end crap that's new), and a "legacy" branch which supports as far back as possible (like Athlon 64).
While Linux may be appealing to those wanting to keep old hardware in use (not because of old software), as current distros support anything Athlon 64 and newer (so approaching 21 years of support), things aren't perfect there either. If you for a specific reason want to keep the OS, then it's about 10 years (Ubuntu LTS with subscription), so fairly similar to Windows. But Linux has one large advantage; APIs are much more stable, and most often backwards compatible, so software generally works better in a newer OS version than what Windows users are used to. And in the off chance a library isn't backwards compatible, it's most often achievable to link in old libraries (in worst case recompile them) and get stuff working with some tinkering.
But for the most part, users clinging to old OS versions isn't a think among Linux users as it is with Windows users, which brings me to what I believe would be the best solution; better compatibility and less bloat. With all the billions MS wastes, they could have achieved support for hardware similar to what Linux does, acceptable performance on older hardware, and better software support. This I would believe would remove most people's "hesitance" in upgrading.Yeah, but don't forget that even the big computer vendors usually lag a bit behind, and some lineups can be ~1.5-2 years before they stopped selling the "unsupported" hardware, so there could be a lot of ~6 year old PCs out there without support.
I have several PCs and one has a Haswell CPU that is not supported by Windows 11.
But it performs very well for its usage : surfing, YouTube, some movies and series, basic Excel or Word.
And next year, it will not suddenly start to be inadequate, because there is a limit to the processing power you need to do these things.
This whole Windows 11 cr*p is completely an anti-consumer play.
I am not looking to spend $1000+ on a new machine to have a worse experience. And I suspect a lot of people are in the same state of mind. Otherwise Windows 11 adoption numbers wouldn't be what they are.
Disabled both edge services 2 days ago and they are both still disabled
I restarted/ shutdown cold start at least 4 times since then to
Whole key seems to be disabling WaaSMedic service this one turns on the services back on
So this app does make it possible thankfully :cool:
Windows Update Blocker v1.8
Also the "overhauled" Terminal is not compatible with several applications so I ended up uninstalling it and using the legacy Command Prompt. I really wanted to like this but I consider Windows 10 a better OS overall in terms of GUI and usability.
At most, you could find Windows to have been the most "consistent" somewhere in the pre-Vista era (most likely with Windows 2000 before the Windows XP theme stuff came in).
Protocols are not "small things", chances are if you are "adding support" for a new protocol you are then decommissioning the deprecated protocol and have to update all of the components within that operating system that now have to support the latest protocol, otherwise you now have to "provide" support for a deprecated protocol that the protocol developers won't be supporting anymore. In which case it makes no rational or business sense to spend resources like that.
But let say you are not decommissioning anything and this is a brand-new protocol, that is a new feature at this point and that new feature is now increasing the surface area of attack, which now is only increasing the costs to provide support for an operating system that isn't on a subscription model. Unless of course you are planning on adding a new feature and then never providing any additional support for it in which case it is hard to make sure "it just works"
What do you call nonsense?If those customers are not paying a subscription of some sort to pay for ongoing patching support for Windows 10, it is more than fair to "leave them behind" after 119+ months of security patches from when the product was originally released. More than fair!
This is like Windows XP all over again with those users screaming bloody murder but when they made the switch to Windows 7 they somehow magically survived!As with any professional software in an enterprise environment the justification for sale is that it reduces IT support help desk calls, this includes security and malware, and or it makes the individual employees more productive via new features.
Businesses that refuse to invest in their IT departments deserve to be left behind.Will only work with a subscription model.So, in other words they received extremely outdated hardware for cheap in which the primary use case for those machines is going to be web browsing....in which case they would be better off with a Chromebook.
would have beenwas "forever". Of course their plan in 2015 (and earlier) was to somehow force all their business and individual users to start paying a subscription. But the plan was unclear and didn't work out, at least not for Windows itself (client, server, CALs).I understand you mean other new fearures here too, such as Alder Lake P+E core support. I agree we shouldn't take for granted that a 6-year old OS should support processors from 2021. CPU upgraders are doing it at their own risk and expense, and that's fine, also because they don't pay any subscription for the OS.